The view from India newsletter Taking stock of the India-Pakistan clashes

The Hindu

12-05-2025

After four days of aerial combat, India and Pakistan reached an 'understanding' on Saturday (May 10) to stop firing and other military activities. According to Director-General Military Operations (DGMO) Lt.-Gen. Rajiv Ghai, he received a message from Pakistan's DGMO Maj. Gen. Kashif Abdullah at 3.35 pm on Saturday on the hotline. 'Since our initial aim was to strike terror camps and all our actions in the subsequent days were in response to the intrusions and violations by the Pakistan Air Force and Pakistan Army, it was decided that I would indeed speak with the Pakistani DGMO,' said Lt. Gen. Ghai. The understanding to stop firing was agreed in the subsequent DGMO level talks.
On Saturday morning, India had carried out massive retaliatory strikes in Pakistan, targeting several military bases, including the high-profile Nur Khan base in Rawalpindi. 'India has fired air-to-surface missiles with its jets,' Pakistani military spokesperson Lt. Gen. Ahmad Sharif Chaudhry told reporters on Saturday morning. In response, Pakistan launched Operation 'Bunyanun Marsoos'. Pakistan carried out strikes using drones, missiles and unmanned combat aerial vehicles targeting civilian and military locations across the western border. India's air defences shot down most of the incoming threats while Indian armed forces also launched counter-strikes on military installations in Pakistan, said military officers.
U.S. involvement
But there are more to the story. On Saturday, the ceasefire was first announced by U.S. President Donald Trump. 'After a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan agreed to a full and immediate ceasefire. Congratulations to both countries on using common sense and great intelligence,' Mr. Trump wrote in a social media post. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also announced that India and Pakistan agreed to 'an immediate ceasefire and to start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site'. Minutes later, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri made a short announcement in New Delhi saying both sides agreed 'to stop all firing and military action on land, air and sea with effect from 1700 hours IST'.
While the Pakistani leadership acknowledged the American role, India remained tight-lipped. But on Sunday (May 11), Mr. Trump wrote another post, saying the U.S. played a part in helping both countries 'to arrive at this historic and heroic decision'. He said the aggression between India and Pakistan 'could have led to the death and destruction of so many, and so much'. Further, he offered to work with India and Pakistan 'to see, after 'a thousand years', a solution can be arrived at concerning Kashmir'. In effect, Mr. Trump took credit for the ceasefire, re-hyphenated India and Pakistan and offered to mediate between the two on Kashmir — all against India's standard position on Kashmir and Pakistan.
Pakistan's escalation
After the ceasefire announcement was made on May 10, CNN carried a report saying the U.S. got 'alarming intel' about the conflict, which prompted Vice-President J.D. Vance to pick up the phone and talk to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. While the report, based on American sources, doesn't say what the intel was, it says there was a 'high probability for dramatic escalation' of the conflict. Mr. Vance outlined to Mr. Modi 'a potential off-ramp', says the report, without offering any details on what the off-ramp was. Indian military officials say India's objective was to hit terror infrastructure inside Pakistan in response to the April 22 Pahalgam massacre and India met those objectives on May 7 when it hit 9 locations inside Pakistan, including Bahawalpur and Muridke in Punjab. But the Pakistani military, commanded by Gen. Asim Munir, decided to widen the conflict by launching drone and missile attacks. Pakistan initially denied carrying out attacks in India even when hundreds of Pakistani drones intruded into the Indian air space. But on May 10, after Indian strikes targeted Pakistani bases, including Nur Khan (Chaklala, Rawalpindi), Murid (Chakwal) and Rafiqui (Shorkot in Jhang), they acknowledged launching 'counterattacks'.
The Pakistanis say they gave a 'befitting reply' to India. On May 7, Pakistan claimed to have shot down 'five Indian fighter jets', including Rafael, without providing any evidence. India hasn't confirmed the Pakistani claims, but on May 11, while asked about loss of assets, Air Marshal A.K. Bharti said in a press conference that 'losses are part of combat', without providing details. We are in a combat scenario, losses are a part of combat. The question you must ask us is... have we achieved our objective of decimating the terrorist camps? And the answer is a thumping yes,' he said. 'As for the details, what could have been... how many numbers... which platform did we lose... at this time I would not like to comment on that because we are still in a combat situation. If I comment on anything, it will be only advantage adversary,' the Air Marshal said, adding that, 'all our pilots are back home'.
There are still unanswered questions. The opposition is asking the government to clarify whether it has accepted third party mediation on Kashmir — an offer Mr. Trump has made. It is also unclear whether India got any assurances from Pakistan in tackling terror when it accepted the ceasefire. On its part, Pakistan is selling its performance as 'a victory' to its public. By launching attacks inside Pakistan in response to the Pahalgam terror attack, India has sought to establish a new normal in its dealings with Islamabad — Pakistan's continued support for terror groups would not go unpunished. Any future act of terror in India will be considered an 'act of war' against the country and will be responded to accordingly, unnamed government officials said on May 10. This is a doctrinal change. But by widening the conflict, Pakistan has sought to make India's new doctrine costly for New Delhi as well. This also means that the understanding to stop firing now (New Delhi doesn't call it a ceasefire) is in essence a pause not a conclusion of hostilities.
The Top Five
1. The terror trio of Pakistan | Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, LeT and JeM
The terrorist organisations, driven by Islamist ideology and anti-India sentiment, have close ties with Pakistan's military-security establishment, and have carried out multiple attacks inside India over the years, writes Suchitra Karthikeyan.
2. How will India's military response be assessed under international law?
An emerging rule in international law allows states to use force extraterritorially in self-defence against non-state actors if the host state is 'unwilling or unable' to take measures to neutralise the threat, writes Aaratrika Bhaumik.
3. A new normal in India-Pakistan ties
Until 2016, India's strategy for dealing with terror attacks linked to Pakistan largely relied on three measures: diplomatic efforts to isolate Pakistan internationally, economic penalties related to terror financing, and pressure on Islamabad to crack down on terror networks. This approach saw limited success, writes Stanly Johny.
4. What will be impact of India-U.K. trade deal? | Explained
How long was the free trade agreement in the works? When is it expected to be signed and implemented? Which are the sectors likely to benefit apart from textile and automobiles? What are the challenges for agriculture and medium and small enterprises? writes Saptaparno Ghosh.
5. Pope Leo XIV | The bridge-building pontiff
The first U.S. pope now faces the monumental task of transcending his national origin to unify a divided Church and navigate a complex world, writes Franciszek Snarski.